Skip to content

perf: add application scenario benchmark results #341

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
JerrettDavis merged 1 commit into from
May 23, 2026
Merged

perf: add application scenario benchmark results #341

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -476,12 +476,18 @@ BenchmarkDotNet guidance is documented in [docs/guides/benchmarks.md](docs/guide
| Message Translator | Execution | 365.30 ns | 2,528 B | 381.79 ns | 2,528 B | Same allocation; fluent was slightly faster in this path. |
| Reliability Pipeline | Construction | 34.90 ns | 392 B | 33.16 ns | 328 B | Generated reduced construction time and allocation in this microbenchmark. |
| Reliability Pipeline | Execution | 2.303 us | 3,992 B | 381.36 ns | 1,872 B | Generated was materially faster and allocated less for duplicate inbox processing plus outbox dispatch. |
| Repository | Construction | 9.793 ns | 112 B | 9.239 ns | 112 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster in this microbenchmark. |
| Repository | Execution | 146.37 ns | 888 B | 143.27 ns | 888 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster for the seed-and-query workflow. |
| Retry | Construction | 25.36 ns | 208 B | 27.18 ns | 208 B | Same allocation; fluent was slightly faster in this microbenchmark. |
| Retry | Execution | 110.53 ns | 600 B | 109.52 ns | 600 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster for the transient retry workflow. |
| Scheduler Agent Supervisor | Construction | 47.29 ns | 400 B | 45.40 ns | 400 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster in this microbenchmark. |
| Scheduler Agent Supervisor | Execution | 177.46 ns | 1,304 B | 180.14 ns | 1,304 B | Effectively equivalent for this scenario. |
| Service Activator | Construction | 4.825 ns | 32 B | 4.641 ns | 32 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster in this microbenchmark. |
| Service Activator | Execution | 25.48 ns | 256 B | 26.49 ns | 256 B | Same allocation; fluent was slightly faster in this path. |
| Specification | Construction | 196.03 ns | 1,704 B | 136.87 ns | 1,008 B | Generated reduced construction time and allocation in this microbenchmark. |
| Specification | Execution | 111.25 ns | 344 B | 93.30 ns | 344 B | Same allocation; generated was faster for loan-application evaluation. |
| Table Data Gateway | Construction | 9.740 ns | 120 B | 9.698 ns | 120 B | Effectively equivalent for this microbenchmark. |
| Table Data Gateway | Execution | 90.51 ns | 600 B | 96.35 ns | 600 B | Same allocation; fluent was slightly faster for the insert-update-query workflow. |

Run the benchmarks on target hardware before making final route decisions:

Expand Down
29 changes: 29 additions & 0 deletions benchmarks/PatternKit.Benchmarks/Application/RepositoryBenchmarks.cs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
using BenchmarkDotNet.Attributes;
using PatternKit.Application.Repository;
using PatternKit.Examples.RepositoryDemo;

namespace PatternKit.Benchmarks.Application;

[BenchmarkCategory("ApplicationArchitecture", "Repository")]
public class RepositoryBenchmarks
{
[Benchmark(Baseline = true, Description = "Fluent: create repository")]
[BenchmarkCategory("Fluent", "Construction")]
public InMemoryRepository<OrderRecord, string> Fluent_CreateRepository()
=> OrderRepositoryPolicies.CreateFluentRepository();

[Benchmark(Description = "Generated: create repository")]
[BenchmarkCategory("Generated", "Construction")]
public InMemoryRepository<OrderRecord, string> Generated_CreateRepository()
=> GeneratedOrderRepository.CreateRepository();

[Benchmark(Description = "Fluent: seed and query repository")]
[BenchmarkCategory("Fluent", "Execution")]
public ValueTask<OrderRepositorySummary> Fluent_SeedAndQuery()
=> OrderRepositoryDemo.RunFluentAsync();

[Benchmark(Description = "Generated: seed and query repository")]
[BenchmarkCategory("Generated", "Execution")]
Comment on lines +10 to +26
public ValueTask<OrderRepositorySummary> Generated_SeedAndQuery()
=> OrderRepositoryDemo.RunGeneratedAsync();
}
38 changes: 38 additions & 0 deletions benchmarks/PatternKit.Benchmarks/Application/SpecificationBenchmarks.cs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
using BenchmarkDotNet.Attributes;
using PatternKit.Application.Specification;
using PatternKit.Examples.SpecificationDemo;

namespace PatternKit.Benchmarks.Application;

[BenchmarkCategory("ApplicationArchitecture", "Specification")]
public class SpecificationBenchmarks
{
private static readonly LoanApprovalSpecificationDemo.LoanApplication PrimeApplication =
LoanApprovalSpecificationDemo.CreatePrimeApplication();

private readonly SpecificationRegistry<LoanApprovalSpecificationDemo.LoanApplication> _fluent =
LoanApprovalSpecificationDemo.CreateFluentRegistry();

private readonly SpecificationRegistry<LoanApprovalSpecificationDemo.LoanApplication> _generated =
LoanApprovalSpecificationDemo.CreateGeneratedRegistry();

[Benchmark(Baseline = true, Description = "Fluent: create specification registry")]
[BenchmarkCategory("Fluent", "Construction")]
public SpecificationRegistry<LoanApprovalSpecificationDemo.LoanApplication> Fluent_CreateRegistry()
=> LoanApprovalSpecificationDemo.CreateFluentRegistry();

[Benchmark(Description = "Generated: create specification registry")]
[BenchmarkCategory("Generated", "Construction")]
public SpecificationRegistry<LoanApprovalSpecificationDemo.LoanApplication> Generated_CreateRegistry()
=> LoanApprovalSpecificationDemo.CreateGeneratedRegistry();

[Benchmark(Description = "Fluent: evaluate loan application")]
[BenchmarkCategory("Fluent", "Execution")]
public LoanApprovalSpecificationDemo.LoanDecision Fluent_EvaluateLoanApplication()
=> LoanApprovalSpecificationDemo.Evaluate(PrimeApplication, _fluent);

[Benchmark(Description = "Generated: evaluate loan application")]
[BenchmarkCategory("Generated", "Execution")]
public LoanApprovalSpecificationDemo.LoanDecision Generated_EvaluateLoanApplication()
=> LoanApprovalSpecificationDemo.Evaluate(PrimeApplication, _generated);
}
29 changes: 29 additions & 0 deletions benchmarks/PatternKit.Benchmarks/Application/TableDataGatewayBenchmarks.cs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
using BenchmarkDotNet.Attributes;
using PatternKit.Application.TableDataGateway;
using PatternKit.Examples.TableDataGatewayDemo;

namespace PatternKit.Benchmarks.Application;

[BenchmarkCategory("ApplicationArchitecture", "TableDataGateway")]
public class TableDataGatewayBenchmarks
{
[Benchmark(Baseline = true, Description = "Fluent: create table data gateway")]
[BenchmarkCategory("Fluent", "Construction")]
public InMemoryTableDataGateway<OrderTableRow, string> Fluent_CreateGateway()
=> OrderTableGatewayPolicies.CreateFluentGateway();

[Benchmark(Description = "Generated: create table data gateway")]
[BenchmarkCategory("Generated", "Construction")]
public InMemoryTableDataGateway<OrderTableRow, string> Generated_CreateGateway()
=> GeneratedOrderTableGateway.CreateGateway();

[Benchmark(Description = "Fluent: insert update query")]
[BenchmarkCategory("Fluent", "Execution")]
public ValueTask<OrderTableGatewaySummary> Fluent_InsertUpdateQuery()
=> OrderTableDataGatewayDemo.RunFluentAsync();

[Benchmark(Description = "Generated: insert update query")]
[BenchmarkCategory("Generated", "Execution")]
public ValueTask<OrderTableGatewaySummary> Generated_InsertUpdateQuery()
=> OrderTableDataGatewayDemo.RunGeneratedAsync();
}
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions docs/guides/benchmark-results.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -23,12 +23,18 @@ The latest measured timings below were captured on Windows 11, Intel Core i9-149
| Message Translator | Execution | 365.30 ns | 2,528 B | 381.79 ns | 2,528 B | Same allocation; fluent was slightly faster in this path. |
| Reliability Pipeline | Construction | 34.90 ns | 392 B | 33.16 ns | 328 B | Generated reduced construction time and allocation in this microbenchmark. |
| Reliability Pipeline | Execution | 2.303 us | 3,992 B | 381.36 ns | 1,872 B | Generated was materially faster and allocated less for duplicate inbox processing plus outbox dispatch. |
| Repository | Construction | 9.793 ns | 112 B | 9.239 ns | 112 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster in this microbenchmark. |
| Repository | Execution | 146.37 ns | 888 B | 143.27 ns | 888 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster for the seed-and-query workflow. |
| Retry | Construction | 25.36 ns | 208 B | 27.18 ns | 208 B | Same allocation; fluent was slightly faster in this microbenchmark. |
| Retry | Execution | 110.53 ns | 600 B | 109.52 ns | 600 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster for the transient retry workflow. |
| Scheduler Agent Supervisor | Construction | 47.29 ns | 400 B | 45.40 ns | 400 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster in this microbenchmark. |
| Scheduler Agent Supervisor | Execution | 177.46 ns | 1,304 B | 180.14 ns | 1,304 B | Effectively equivalent for this scenario. |
| Service Activator | Construction | 4.825 ns | 32 B | 4.641 ns | 32 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster in this microbenchmark. |
| Service Activator | Execution | 25.48 ns | 256 B | 26.49 ns | 256 B | Same allocation; fluent was slightly faster in this path. |
| Specification | Construction | 196.03 ns | 1,704 B | 136.87 ns | 1,008 B | Generated reduced construction time and allocation in this microbenchmark. |
| Specification | Execution | 111.25 ns | 344 B | 93.30 ns | 344 B | Same allocation; generated was faster for loan-application evaluation. |
| Table Data Gateway | Construction | 9.740 ns | 120 B | 9.698 ns | 120 B | Effectively equivalent for this microbenchmark. |
| Table Data Gateway | Execution | 90.51 ns | 600 B | 96.35 ns | 600 B | Same allocation; fluent was slightly faster for the insert-update-query workflow. |

## Coverage Matrix Summary

Expand Down
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions docs/guides/benchmarks.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -40,12 +40,18 @@ The following numbers were captured on Windows 11, Intel Core i9-14900K, .NET SD
| Message Translator | Execution | 365.30 ns | 2,528 B | 381.79 ns | 2,528 B | Same allocation; fluent was slightly faster in this path. |
| Reliability Pipeline | Construction | 34.90 ns | 392 B | 33.16 ns | 328 B | Generated reduced construction time and allocation in this microbenchmark. |
| Reliability Pipeline | Execution | 2.303 us | 3,992 B | 381.36 ns | 1,872 B | Generated was materially faster and allocated less for duplicate inbox processing plus outbox dispatch. |
| Repository | Construction | 9.793 ns | 112 B | 9.239 ns | 112 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster in this microbenchmark. |
| Repository | Execution | 146.37 ns | 888 B | 143.27 ns | 888 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster for the seed-and-query workflow. |
| Retry | Construction | 25.36 ns | 208 B | 27.18 ns | 208 B | Same allocation; fluent was slightly faster in this microbenchmark. |
| Retry | Execution | 110.53 ns | 600 B | 109.52 ns | 600 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster for the transient retry workflow. |
| Scheduler Agent Supervisor | Construction | 47.29 ns | 400 B | 45.40 ns | 400 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster in this microbenchmark. |
| Scheduler Agent Supervisor | Execution | 177.46 ns | 1,304 B | 180.14 ns | 1,304 B | Effectively equivalent for this scenario. |
| Service Activator | Construction | 4.825 ns | 32 B | 4.641 ns | 32 B | Same allocation; generated was slightly faster in this microbenchmark. |
| Service Activator | Execution | 25.48 ns | 256 B | 26.49 ns | 256 B | Same allocation; fluent was slightly faster in this path. |
| Specification | Construction | 196.03 ns | 1,704 B | 136.87 ns | 1,008 B | Generated reduced construction time and allocation in this microbenchmark. |
| Specification | Execution | 111.25 ns | 344 B | 93.30 ns | 344 B | Same allocation; generated was faster for loan-application evaluation. |
| Table Data Gateway | Construction | 9.740 ns | 120 B | 9.698 ns | 120 B | Effectively equivalent for this microbenchmark. |
| Table Data Gateway | Execution | 90.51 ns | 600 B | 96.35 ns | 600 B | Same allocation; fluent was slightly faster for the insert-update-query workflow. |

The coverage matrix is separate from the scenario timings. Matrix benchmarks prove every catalog pattern and every generator source file has a reportable BenchmarkDotNet route; pattern-specific scenario benchmarks provide the fluent-vs-generated construction and execution numbers shown above. See [Benchmark Results](benchmark-results.md) for the full pattern and generator matrix.

Expand Down
Loading